|
Enter a Search String | | Special character and space not allowed in the query term.
Search string should be at least 2 characters long. |
Molecule Parameter List for craf-1 | The statistics table lists the distribution of a molecule acting either as a substrate, product, enzyme or as a molecule within the network.
The text color of a molecule is highlighted by  color. | | Statistics |
Accession and Pathway Details | |
| Accession Name | Accession No. | Accession Type | Pathway Link | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2 | 83 | Network | Shared_Object_Ajay_Bhalla_2007_ReacDiff, PKC, MAPK,
Ras, CaM, PKM, chain, kinetics, PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[1],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, kinetics[3], CaM, PKM, kinetics[2], PKC, MAPK, Ras,
CaM, PKM, PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[4], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM,
PKM, kinetics[5], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[6], PKC, MAPK,
Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[7], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[8],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[9], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[10],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[11], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[12],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[13], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[14],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[15], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[16],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[17], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[18],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[19], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[20],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[21], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[22],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[23], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[24],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[25], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[26],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[27], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[28],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[29], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[30],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[31], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[32],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[33], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[34],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[35], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[36],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[37], PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM, kinetics[38],
PKC, MAPK, Ras, CaM, PKM | This is a 40-compartment reaction-diffusion-transport version of the Ajay_Bhalla_2007_PKM model. The original single-compartment model is repeated 40 times. In addition, a subset (27 out of 42) molecules can diffuse between compartments. Diffusion is implemented as a reaction between corresponding molecules in neighboring compartments. For D = 1e-12 m^2/sec (i.e., 1 micron^2/sec ) the kf and kb of this reaction for these 10 micron compartments are both 0.01/sec In addition, we have a forward (dendrite to soma) transport term of 1 microns/sec. This converts to a rate of 0.1/sec, but applies only to the kf. So the total kf of the diffusion 'reaction' is 0.11 for D = 1 micron^2/sec, and kb is 0.01. If D=0.1 micron^2/sec then kf = 0.101 and kb = 0.001. In addition this model has all molecules buffered in the first and last compartments. This boundary conditions says that the molecules are not drained out of the first compartment, nor do they all pile up in the last one.
The stimulus file pkm_mapk22_transp_endbuf_D1e-13_Fig4CD which was used for the model to replicate Figure 4C and 4D from the paper.
|
craf-1 acting as a Molecule in Ajay_Bhalla_2007_ReacDiff2 Network
| Name | Accession Name | Pathway Name | Initial Conc.
(uM) | Volume
(fL) | Buffered | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 686 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 692 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 699 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 704 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 710 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 716 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 722 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 728 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 734 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 740 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 746 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 752 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 758 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 764 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 770 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 776 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 782 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 788 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 794 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 800 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 806 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 812 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 818 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 824 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 830 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 836 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 842 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 848 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 854 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 860 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 866 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 872 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 878 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 884 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 890 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 896 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 902 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 908 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | No | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 679 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | Yes | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 | | craf-1 | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | MAPK
Pathway No. : 914 | 0.4826 | 1.5 | Yes | | Couldn't find any ref to the actual conc of craf-1 but I should try Strom et al Oncogene 5 pp 345 In line with the other kinases in the cascade, I estimate the conc to be 0.2 uM. To init we use 0.15, which is close to equil 16 May 2003: Changing to synaptic levels. Increasing 2.5 fold to 0.5 uM. See Mihaly et al 1991 Brain Res 547(2):309-14 and Morice et al 1999 Eur J Neurosci 11(6):1995-2006 |
craf-1 acting as a Substrate for an Enzyme in Ajay_Bhalla_2007_ReacDiff2 Network
| | Enzyme Molecule /
Enzyme Activity | Accession Name | Pathway Name | Km (uM) | kcat (s^-1) | Ratio | Enzyme Type | Reagents | | 1 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | Shared_Object_
Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff
Pathway No. : 677 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 2 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics
Pathway No. : 684 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 3 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[1]
Pathway No. : 690 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 4 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[2]
Pathway No. : 697 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 5 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[3]
Pathway No. : 694 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 6 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[4]
Pathway No. : 708 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 7 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[5]
Pathway No. : 714 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 8 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[6]
Pathway No. : 720 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 9 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[7]
Pathway No. : 726 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 10 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[8]
Pathway No. : 732 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 11 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[9]
Pathway No. : 738 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 12 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[10]
Pathway No. : 744 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 13 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[11]
Pathway No. : 750 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 14 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[12]
Pathway No. : 756 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 15 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[13]
Pathway No. : 762 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 16 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[14]
Pathway No. : 768 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 17 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[31]
Pathway No. : 870 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 18 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[15]
Pathway No. : 774 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 19 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[16]
Pathway No. : 780 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 20 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[17]
Pathway No. : 786 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 21 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[18]
Pathway No. : 792 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 22 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[19]
Pathway No. : 798 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 23 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[20]
Pathway No. : 804 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 24 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[21]
Pathway No. : 810 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 25 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[22]
Pathway No. : 816 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 26 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[23]
Pathway No. : 822 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 27 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[24]
Pathway No. : 828 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 28 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[25]
Pathway No. : 834 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 29 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[26]
Pathway No. : 840 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 30 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[27]
Pathway No. : 846 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 31 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[28]
Pathway No. : 852 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 32 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[29]
Pathway No. : 858 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 33 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[30]
Pathway No. : 864 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 34 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[32]
Pathway No. : 876 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 35 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[33]
Pathway No. : 882 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 36 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[34]
Pathway No. : 888 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 37 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[35]
Pathway No. : 894 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 38 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[36]
Pathway No. : 900 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 39 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[37]
Pathway No. : 906 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC | | 40 | PKC-active /
PKC-act-raf | Ajay_Bhalla_
2007_ReacDiff2
Accession No. : 83 | kinetics[38]
Pathway No. : 912 | 20.0005 | 4 | 4 | explicit E-S complex | Substrate
craf-1
Product
craf-1*
| | | Rate consts from Chen et al Biochem 32, 1032 (1993) k3 = k2 = 4 k1 = 9e-5 recalculated gives 1.666e-5, which is not very different. Looks like k3 is rate-limiting in this case: there is a huge amount of craf locked up in the enz complex. Let us assume a 10x higher Km, ie, lower affinity. k1 drops by 10x. Also changed k2 to 4x k3. Lowerd k1 to 1e-6 to balance 10X DAG sensitivity of PKC |
craf-1 acting as a Product of an Enzyme in Ajay_Bhalla_2007_ReacDiff2 Network
craf-1 acting as a Substrate in a reaction in Ajay_Bhalla_2007_ReacDiff2 Network
| Kd is calculated only for second order reactions, like nA+nB <->nC or nA<->nC+nD, where n is number and A,B,C,D are molecules, where as for first order reactions Keq is calculated.
Kd for higher order reaction are not consider. |
craf-1 acting as a Product in a reaction in Ajay_Bhalla_2007_ReacDiff2 Network
| Kd is calculated only for second order reactions, like nA+nB <->nC or nA<->nC+nD, where n is number and A,B,C,D are molecules, where as for first order reactions Keq is calculated.
Kd for higher order reaction are not consider. |
| Database compilation and code copyright (C) 2022, Upinder S. Bhalla and NCBS/TIFR
This Copyright is applied to ensure that the contents of this database remain freely available. Please see FAQ for details. |
|
