Transient kinetic isotope effects (or fractionation) occur when the reaction leading to isotope fractionation does not follow pure first-order kinetics (FOK) and therefore isotopic effects cannot be described with the classical equilibrium fractionation equations or with steady-state kinetic fractionation equations (also known as the Rayleigh equation).[1] In these instances, the general equations for biochemical isotope kinetics (GEBIK) and the general equations for biochemical isotope fractionation (GEBIF) can be used. 
The GEBIK and GEBIF equations are the most generalized approach to describe isotopic effects in any chemical, catalytic reaction and biochemical reactions because they can describe isotopic effects in equilibrium reactions, kinetic chemical reactions and kinetic biochemical reactions.[2] In the latter two cases, they can describe both stationary and non-stationary fractionation (i.e., variable and inverse fractionation). In general, isotopic effects depend on the number of reactants and on the number of combinations resulting from the number of substitutions in all reactants and products. Describing with accuracy isotopic effects, however, depends also on the specific rate law used to describe the chemical or biochemical reaction that produces isotopic effects. Normally, regardless of whether a reaction is purely chemical or whether it involves some enzyme of biological nature, the equations used to describe isotopic effects base on FOK. This approach systematically leads to isotopic effects that can be described by means of the Rayleigh equation. In this case, isotopic effects will always be expressed as a constant, hence will not be able to describe isotopic effects in reactions where fractionation and enrichment are variable or inverse during the course of a reaction. Most chemical reactions do not follow FOK; neither biochemical reactions can normally be described with FOK. To properly describe isotopic effects in chemical or biochemical reactions, different approaches must be employed such as the use of Michaelis–Menten reaction order (for chemical reactions) or coupled Michaelis–Menten and Monod reaction orders (for biochemical reactions). However, conversely to Michaelis–Menten kinetics, GEBIK and GEBIF equations are solved under the hypothesis of non-steady state. This characteristic allows GEBIK and GEBIF to capture transient isotopic effects. 
  Mathematical description of transient kinetic isotope effects
 The GEBIK and GEBIF equations are introduced here below. 
 Notation
 The GEBIK and GEBIF equations describe the dynamics of the following state variables 
 - S
- substrate concentration
- P
- product concentration
- E
- enzyme concentration
- C
- complex concentration
- B
- biomass concentration
 
Both S and P contain at least one isotopic expression of a tracer atom. For instance, if the carbon element is used as a tracer, both S and P contain at least one C atom, which may appear as  and
 and  . The isotopic expression within a molecule is
. The isotopic expression within a molecule is 
  
where  is the number of tracer atoms within S, while
 is the number of tracer atoms within S, while  is the number of isotopic substitutions in the same molecule. The condition
 is the number of isotopic substitutions in the same molecule. The condition  must be satisfied. For example, the
 must be satisfied. For example, the  product in which 1 isotopic substitution occurs (e.g.,
 product in which 1 isotopic substitution occurs (e.g.,  ) will be described by
) will be described by  .
. 
Substrates and products appear in a chemical reaction with specific stoichiometric coefficients. When chemical reactions comprise combinations of reactants and products with various isotopic expressions, the stoichiometric coefficients are functions of the isotope substitution number. If  and
 and  are the stoichiometric coefficient for
 are the stoichiometric coefficient for  substrate and
 substrate and  product, a reaction takes the form
 product, a reaction takes the form 
  
For example, in the reaction  , the notation is
, the notation is  with
 with  for both isotopologue reactants of the same substrate with substitution number
 for both isotopologue reactants of the same substrate with substitution number  and
 and  , and with
, and with  for
 for  and
 and  because the reaction does not comprise production of
 because the reaction does not comprise production of  and
 and  .
. 
For isotopomers, the substitution location is taken into account as  and
 and  , where
, where  and
 and  indicate a different expressions of the same isotopologue
 indicate a different expressions of the same isotopologue  . Isotopomers only exist when
. Isotopomers only exist when  and
 and  . The substitution location has to be specifically defined depending on the number of tracer atoms a, number of substitutions b, and molecule structure. For multiatomic molecules that are symmetric with respect to tracer position, there is no need to specify the substitution position when
. The substitution location has to be specifically defined depending on the number of tracer atoms a, number of substitutions b, and molecule structure. For multiatomic molecules that are symmetric with respect to tracer position, there is no need to specify the substitution position when  . For example, one substitution of deuterium
. For example, one substitution of deuterium  [a] in the symmetric methane molecule
[a] in the symmetric methane molecule  does not require the use of the right superscript. In the case that
 does not require the use of the right superscript. In the case that  , the substitution location has to be specified, while for
, the substitution location has to be specified, while for  and
 and  it is not required. For example, two 2H substitutions in
 it is not required. For example, two 2H substitutions in  can occur in adjacent or non-adjacent locations. Using this notation, the reaction
 can occur in adjacent or non-adjacent locations. Using this notation, the reaction  can be written as
 can be written as 
  
where  in
 in  defines only one of the two methane forms (either with adjacent or non-adjacent D atoms). The location of D in the two isotopologue water molecules produced on the right-hand side of the reaction has not been indicated because D is present in only one water molecule at saturation, and because the water molecule is symmetric. For asymmetric and multiatomic molecules with
 defines only one of the two methane forms (either with adjacent or non-adjacent D atoms). The location of D in the two isotopologue water molecules produced on the right-hand side of the reaction has not been indicated because D is present in only one water molecule at saturation, and because the water molecule is symmetric. For asymmetric and multiatomic molecules with  and
 and  , definition of the substitution location is always required. For instance, the isotopomers of the (asymmetric) nitrous oxide molecule
, definition of the substitution location is always required. For instance, the isotopomers of the (asymmetric) nitrous oxide molecule  are
 are  and
 and  .
. 
Reactions of asymmetric isotopomers can be written using the partitioning coefficient u as 
  
where  . For example, using N isotope tracers, the isotopomer reactions
. For example, using N isotope tracers, the isotopomer reactions 
  
 
can be written as one reaction in which each isotopomer product is multiplied by its partition coefficient as 
  
with  . More generally, the tracer element does not necessarily occur in only one substrate and one product. If
. More generally, the tracer element does not necessarily occur in only one substrate and one product. If  substrates react releasing
 substrates react releasing  products, each having an isotopic expression of the tracer element, then the generalized reaction notation is
 products, each having an isotopic expression of the tracer element, then the generalized reaction notation is 
 |  |  | 1 | 
 For instance, consider the  and
 and  tracers in the reaction
 tracers in the reaction 
  
In this case the reaction can be written as 
  
with two substrates and two products without indication of the substitution location because all molecules are symmetric. 
Biochemical kinetic reactions of type (1) are often catalytic reactions in which one or more substrates,  , bind to an enzyme, E, to form a reversible activated complex, C, which releases one or more products,
, bind to an enzyme, E, to form a reversible activated complex, C, which releases one or more products,  , and free, unchanged enzyme. These reactions belong to the type of reactions that can be described by Michaelis–Menten kinetics. Using this approach for substrate and product isotopologue and isotopomer expressions, and under the prescribed stoichiometric relationships among them, leads to the general reactions of the Michaelis–Menten type
, and free, unchanged enzyme. These reactions belong to the type of reactions that can be described by Michaelis–Menten kinetics. Using this approach for substrate and product isotopologue and isotopomer expressions, and under the prescribed stoichiometric relationships among them, leads to the general reactions of the Michaelis–Menten type 
 | ![{\displaystyle \sum _{j=1}^{n_{{\ce {S}}}}\sum _{b_{ji}=0}^{a_{ji}}\sum _{\beta _{ji}}x_{b_{ji}}\ {_{a_{j}}^{b_{ji}}}{\ce {S}}_{j}^{\beta _{ji}}+{\ce {E <=>[{k}_{1(i)}][{k}_{2(i)}]}}{\ce {C}}_{i}{\ce {->[{k}_{3(i)}]}}\sum _{h=1}^{n_{{\ce {P}}}}\sum _{d_{hi}=0}^{c_{hi}}\sum _{\gamma _{hi}}u_{\gamma _{hi}}y_{d_{hi}}\ {_{c_{h}}^{d_{hi}}}{\ce {P}}_{h}^{\gamma _{hi}}+{\ce {E}}}](./_assets_/85caa0127f2952b4e1c7660eff7ab752ede94461.svg) |  | 2 | 
 with the index  , where m depends on the number of possible atomic combinations among all isotopologues and isotopomers. Here,
, where m depends on the number of possible atomic combinations among all isotopologues and isotopomers. Here,  ,
,  , and
, and  are the rate constants indexed for each of the m reactions.
 are the rate constants indexed for each of the m reactions. 
 Example
 The reactions 
  
 
 
 
can be written as 
 ![{\displaystyle {\ce {{2_{1}^{0}S}+{E}<=>[{k}_{1(1)}][{k}_{2(1)}]{C1}->[{k}_{3(1)}]{^{0}_{2}P}+{E}}}}](./_assets_/153964b13a43459de0d575a73ee76e087fbcaf45.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\ce {{^{0}_{1}S}+{^{1}_{1}S}+{E}<=>[{k}_{1(2)}][{k}_{2(2)}]{C2}->[{k}_{3(2)}]{\mathit {u}}_{\beta }{^{1}_{2}P}^{\beta }+{\mathit {u}}_{\gamma }{^{1}_{2}P}^{\gamma }+{E}}}}](./_assets_/c63de0837b38d1eff73ea2938064bda081f03b8a.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\ce {{2_{1}^{1}S}+{E}<=>[{k}_{1(3)}][{k}_{2(3)}]{C3}->[{k}_{3(3)}]{^{2}_{2}P}+{E}}}}](./_assets_/30c46c91ffae87a795f8ccaa26aa10fde09bd8f4.svg) 
Isotope mass balance
 The following isotope mass balances must hold 
  
 
General equations for biochemical isotope kinetics (GEBIK)
 To solve for the concentration of all components appearing in any general biochemical reaction as in (2), the Michaelis–Menten kinetics for an enzymatic reaction are coupled with the Monod kinetics for biomass dynamics. The most general case is to assume that the enzyme concentration is proportional to the biomass concentration and that the reaction is not in quasi-steady state. These hypotheses lead to the following system of equations 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{b_{j}}_{a_{j}}}{\ce {S}}_{j}^{\beta _{j}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}=\sum _{i}x_{b_{ji}}[{k}_{2(i)}C_{i}-{k}_{1(i)}{E{\overline {S}}}_{i}]}](./_assets_/e9fc0969d2fcc108a20917300506b90e4134cb00.svg) |  | 3a | 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}C_{i}}{{\ce {d}}t}}={k}_{1(i)}{E{\overline {S}}}_{i}-[{k}_{2(i)}+{k}_{3(i)}]C_{i}}](./_assets_/da1c05938578749fd4c2464095032d1e38db0731.svg) |  | 3b | 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{d_{h}}_{c_{h}}}{\ce {P}}_{h}^{\gamma _{h}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}=\sum _{i}u_{\gamma _{hi}}y_{d_{hi}}{k}_{3(i)}C_{i}}](./_assets_/26a47a959ff8ff0e00b953cae5d2557714d2053f.svg) |  | 3c | 
 |  |  | 3d | 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}B}{{\ce {d}}t}}=Y\sum _{h}\sum _{d_{h}}\sum _{\gamma _{h}}{\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{d_{h}}_{c_{h}}}{\ce {P}}_{h}^{\gamma _{h}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}-\mu B}](./_assets_/f5da145dc7245bd0ab7002d2193a56f3c803d930.svg) |  | 3e | 
 with  , and where
, and where  is the concentration of the most limiting substrate in each reaction i, z is the enzyme yield coefficient, Y is the yield coefficient expressing the biomass gain per unit of released product and
 is the concentration of the most limiting substrate in each reaction i, z is the enzyme yield coefficient, Y is the yield coefficient expressing the biomass gain per unit of released product and  is the biomass mortality rate.[4]
 is the biomass mortality rate.[4] 
 General equations for biochemical isotope fractionation (GEBIF)
 The isotopic composition of the components in a biochemical system can be defined in different ways depending on the definition of isotopic ratio. Three definitions are described here: 
 Isotopic ratio – definition 1
 Isotopic ratio relative to each component in the system, each with its isotopic expression, with respect to the concentration of its most abundant isotopologue 
  
 
Isotopic ratio – definition 2
 Isotopic ratio relative to the mass of the tracer element in each component; 
  
 
where,  and
 and  are the molecular weight of each isotopic expression of the substrate and product.
 are the molecular weight of each isotopic expression of the substrate and product. 
 Isotopic ratio – definition 3
 Isotopic ratio relative to the mass of the tracer element in the accumulated substrates and products 
  
 
Isotopic composition
 Regardless of the definition of the isotopic ratio, the isotopic composition of substrate and product are expressed as 
 |  , |  | 4a | 
 |  . |  | 4a | 
 where  is a standard isotopic ration. Here, definition 3 of isotopic ratio has been used, however, any of the three definitions of isotopic ratio can equally be used.
 is a standard isotopic ration. Here, definition 3 of isotopic ratio has been used, however, any of the three definitions of isotopic ratio can equally be used. 
 Fractionation factor
 The isotopic ratio of the product can be used to define the instantaneous isotopic ratio 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\ce {IR}}_{\ce {P}}(t)={\cfrac {\displaystyle \sum _{h}\sum _{d_{h}\neq 0}\sum _{\gamma _{h}}{\cfrac {d_{h}q}{^{d_{h}}M_{{\ce {P}}_{h}}}}\ {\cfrac {{\ce {d}}[{^{d_{h}}_{c_{h}}}{\ce {P}}_{h}^{\gamma _{h}}(t)]}{{\ce {d}}t}}}{\displaystyle \sum _{h}\sum _{d_{h}\neq c_{h}}\sum _{\gamma _{h}}{\cfrac {(c_{h}-d_{h})p}{^{d_{h}}M_{{\ce {P}}_{h}}}}\ {\cfrac {{\ce {d}}[{^{d_{h}}_{c_{h}}}{\ce {P}}_{h}^{\gamma _{h}}(t)]}{{\ce {d}}t}}}}}](./_assets_/054e8158fa420f55aacf7c2b3b2ba4006a219d5d.svg) |  | 5 | 
 and the time-dependent fractionation factor 
 |  |  | 6 | 
 Isotopic enrichment
 The time-dependent isotopic enrichment is simply defined as 
 |  |  | 7 | 
  Under specific assumptions, the GEBIK and GEBIF equations become equivalent to the equation for steady-state kinetic isotope fractionation in both chemical and biochemical reactions. Here two mathematical treatments are proposed: (i) under biomass-free and enzyme-invariant (BFEI) hypothesis and (ii) under quasi-steady-state (QSS) hypothesis. 
 BFEI hypothesis
 In instances where the biomass and enzyme concentrations are not appreciably changing in time, we can assume that biomass dynamics is negligible and that the total enzyme concentration is constant, and the GEBIK equations become 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{b_{j}}_{a_{j}}}{\ce {S}}_{j}^{\beta _{j}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}=\sum _{i}x_{b_{ji}}[{k}_{2(i)}C_{i}-{k}_{1(i)}{E{\overline {S}}}_{i}]}](./_assets_/e9fc0969d2fcc108a20917300506b90e4134cb00.svg) |  | 8a | 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}C_{i}}{{\ce {d}}t}}={k}_{1(i)}{E{\overline {S}}}_{i}-[{k}_{2(i)}+{k}_{3(i)}]C_{i}}](./_assets_/da1c05938578749fd4c2464095032d1e38db0731.svg) |  | 8b | 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{d_{h}}_{c_{h}}}{\ce {P}}_{h}^{\gamma _{h}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}=\sum _{i}u_{\gamma _{hi}}y_{d_{hi}}{k}_{3(i)}{\ce {C}}_{i}}](./_assets_/7b89807cabc226860e6444c4f56aeb95db4414e7.svg) |  | 8c | 
 |  |  | 8d | 
 Eqs. (4) for isotopic compositions, Eq. (6) for the fractionation factor and Eq. (7) for the enrichment factor equally applies to the GEBIK equations under the BFEI hypothesis. 
 QSS hypothesis
 If the quasi-steady-state hypothesis is assumed in addition to BFEI hypothesis, then the complex concentration can be assumed to be in a stationary (steady) state according to the Briggs–Haldane hypothesis, and the GEBIK equations become 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{_{a_{j}}^{b_{j}}}{\ce {S}}_{j}^{\beta _{j}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}\simeq -\sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {x_{b_{ji}}{k}_{3(i)}E_{0}{\overline {S}}_{i}}{{\overline {S}}_{i}+K_{i}\left(1+\displaystyle \sum _{p\neq i}{\dfrac {{\overline {S}}_{p}}{K_{p}}}\right)}}}](./_assets_/273fdb250a0a9a5eb58f01e6bd0abcb7c4b16ac7.svg) |  | 9a | 
 | ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{d_{h}}_{c_{h}}}{\ce {P}}_{h}^{\gamma _{h}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}\simeq \sum _{i=1}^{m}{\frac {u_{\gamma _{hi}}y_{d_{hi}}{k}_{3(i)}E_{0}{\overline {S}}_{i}}{{\overline {S}}_{i}+K_{i}\left(1+\displaystyle \sum _{p\neq i}{\dfrac {{\overline {S}}_{p}}{K_{p}}}\right)}}}](./_assets_/fa28eb45893b78f3daa0fbd8dbd2286b413b1ebc.svg) |  | 9a | 
 which are written in a form similar to the classical Micaelis-Menten equations for any substrate and product. Here, the equations also show that the various isotopologue and isotopomer substrates appear as competing species. Eqs. (4) for isotopic compositions, Eq. (6) for the fractionation factor and Eq. (7) for the enrichment factor equally applies to the GEBIK equations under the BFEI and QSS hypothesis. 
 Example of application of GEBIK and GEBIF
 An example is shown where GEBIK and GEBIF equations are used to describe the isotopic reactions of  consumption into
 consumption into  according to the simultaneous set of reactions
 according to the simultaneous set of reactions 
  
 
 
These can be rewritten using the notation introduced before as. 
 ![{\displaystyle {\ce {{^{0}_{2}S}+{E}<=>[{k}_{2(1)}][{k}_{1(1)}]C1->[{k}_{3(1)}]{^{0}_{2}P}+{E},}}}](./_assets_/9f119997794d33293da2a13b90a11098d6083a01.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\ce {{^{1}_{2}S}^{\beta }+{E}<=>[{k}_{2(2)}][{k}_{1(2)}]C2->[{k}_{3(2)}]{^{1}_{2}P}+{E},}}}](./_assets_/9b59c867eb9582020284ccdc107a511c5580f94c.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\ce {{^{1}_{2}S}^{\gamma }+{E}<=>[{k}_{2(3)}][{k}_{1(3)}]C3->[{k}_{3(3)}]{^{1}_{2}P}+{E},}}}](./_assets_/75b15527cb6beaee78ab6bfb83039ecd1bb50035.svg) 
The substrate  has not been included due to its scarcity. In addition, we have not specified the isotopic substitution in the
 has not been included due to its scarcity. In addition, we have not specified the isotopic substitution in the  product of the second and third reactions because
 product of the second and third reactions because  is symmetric. Assuming that the second and third reactions have identical reaction rates
 is symmetric. Assuming that the second and third reactions have identical reaction rates  ,
,  , and
, and  , the full GEBIK and GEBIF equations are
, the full GEBIK and GEBIF equations are 
 ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{\ce {^0_2S}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}={k}_{2(1)}{\ce {C1}}-{k}_{1(1)}{\ce {^0_2S E}}}](./_assets_/09685becfdac3003fa4005fde0c10f9c9d042e83.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{\ce {^{1}_{2}S^{\beta }}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}={k}_{2(2)}{\ce {C2}}-{k}_{1(2)}{\ce {^{1}_{2}S^{\beta }E}}}](./_assets_/51b02530e5b833f57b2f2e2b6110da343d25d2ea.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{\ce {^{1}_{2}S^{\gamma }}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}={k}_{2(2)}{\ce {C3}}-{k}_{1(2)}{\ce {^{1}_{2}S^{\gamma }E}}}](./_assets_/81deb981c8fc437ef59fd65d9bf92c57e657d7e3.svg) 
 
 
 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{\ce {^0_2P}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}={k}_{3(1)}{\ce {C1}}}](./_assets_/f8d8e69c2874467d6bc71505da7ace1d0ce11cc7.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{\ce {^1_2P}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}={k}_{3(2)}({\ce {C2}}+{\ce {C3}})}](./_assets_/2cee6aa3d26b9e34c3ccccdf319ae6c187dab15a.svg) 
 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}B}{{\ce {d}}t}}=Y\left({\frac {{\ce {d}}[{\ce {^0_2P}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}+{\frac {{\ce {d}}[{\ce {^1_2P}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}\right)-\mu B}](./_assets_/ef27dfc0900d1f1f1f4a0b744d3f11c172ccc448.svg) 
 
 
 
![{\displaystyle \alpha (t)={\frac {7\ ({\ce {C2}}+{\ce {C3}}){k}_{3(2)}[45\ {\ce {^{0}_{2}S}}+22\ {\ce {^{1}_{2}S}}]}{11\ [29\ {\ce {C1}}{k}_{3(1)}+14\ ({\ce {C2}}+{\ce {C3}}){k}_{3(2)}]\ {_{2}^{1}}{\ce {S}}}}}](./_assets_/efe35d6ee1f837c2495438cb20134afc281887c3.svg) 
Example of application of GEBIK and GEBIF under BFEI and QSS hypotheses
 The same reaction can be described with the GEBIK and GEBIF equations under the BFEI and QSS approximations as 
 ![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{0}_{2}}{\ce {S}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}\simeq -{\frac {{k}_{3(1)}E_{0}{^{0}_{2}}{\ce {S}}}{^{0}_{2}{\ce {S}}+{\ce {K1}}\left(1+{\dfrac {{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\beta }}{\ce {K2}}}+{\dfrac {{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\gamma }}{\ce {K2}}}\right)}}}](./_assets_/96e9fef91dcf279a995823836fb37a7993112318.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\beta }]}{{\ce {d}}t}}\simeq -{\frac {{k}_{3(2)}E_{0}{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\beta }}{^{1}_{2}{\ce {S}}^{\beta }+{\ce {K2}}\left(1+{\dfrac {{^{0}_{2}}{\ce {S}}}{\ce {K1}}}+{\dfrac {{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\gamma }}{\ce {K2}}}\right)}}}](./_assets_/cca3f8ed1dd456200dc3f665a03b734e5d84ef05.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\gamma }]}{{\ce {d}}t}}\simeq -{\frac {{k}_{3(2)}E_{0}{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\gamma }}{^{1}_{2}{\ce {S}}^{\gamma }+{\ce {K2}}\left(1+{\dfrac {{^{0}_{2}}{\ce {S}}}{\ce {K1}}}+{\dfrac {{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\beta }}{\ce {K2}}}\right)}}}](./_assets_/577168bc9a56943b1bed50158b9972fb6dca4267.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}{_{2}^{0}}{\ce {P}}}{{\ce {d}}t}}=-{\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{0}_{2}}{\ce {S}}]}{{\ce {d}}t}}}](./_assets_/5a008fc05cfbb7637631107d24cea795178089da.svg) 
![{\displaystyle {\frac {{\ce {d}}{_{2}^{1}}{\ce {P}}}{{\ce {d}}t}}=-{\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\beta }]}{{\ce {d}}t}}-{\frac {{\ce {d}}[{^{1}_{2}}{\ce {S}}^{\gamma }]}{{\ce {d}}t}}}](./_assets_/6ddc8245ef6404386382a4e634259b739fa64a2e.svg) 
 
 
![{\displaystyle R_{S}(t)={\frac {465\ {_{2}^{1}}{\ce {S}}}{14[63\ {_{2}^{0}}{\ce {S}}+31\ {_{2}^{1}}{\ce {S}}]}}}](./_assets_/91ef326dbee1c0229ce74bd02d31b30721dd8038.svg) 
![{\displaystyle \alpha (t)={\frac {14{\ce {K1}}{k}_{3(2)}[63\ {_{2}^{0}}{\ce {S}}+31\ {_{2}^{1}}{\ce {S}}]}{31[29{\ce {K2}}{k}_{3(1)}\ {_{2}^{0}}{\ce {S}}+14{\ce {K1}}{k}_{3(2)}\ {_{2}^{0}}{\ce {S}}]}}}](./_assets_/7a49c23c3a90d28dcd3a8c42d78ee7f7293f3be1.svg) 
where  has been substituted with
 has been substituted with  because the rate constants in the third reaction have been assumed to equal those of the second reaction.
 because the rate constants in the third reaction have been assumed to equal those of the second reaction. 
 See also
  Notes
   - ^ IUPAC recommends that the symbol for deuterium should be 2H, rather than D.[3] 
  References
   - ^ Mariotti A., J.C. Germon, P. Hubert, P. Kaiser, R. Letolle, A. Tardieux, P. Tardieux, (1981), Experimental determination of nitrogen kinetic isotope fractionation – Some principles – Illustration for the denitrification and nitrification processes, Plant and Soil 62(3), 413–430. 
- ^ Maggi F. and W. J. Riley, (2010), Mathematical treatment of isotopologue and isotopomer speciation and fractionation in biochemical kinetics, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta, doi:10.1016/j.gca.2009.12.021 
- ^ "Provisional Recommendations". Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry. Chemical Nomenclature and Structure Representation Division. IUPAC. § IR-3.3.2. Archived from the original on 27 October 2006. Retrieved 7 August 2024. 
- ^ Monod J. (1949) The growth of bacterial cultures. Annu. Rev. Microbial. 3, 371–394.