Force-extension experiments reveal increased compliance and reduced elastic modulus of titin in myofibrils at lower pH, indicating pH sensitivity in muscle elasticity.
The intrinsically disordered PEVK region in the I-band region of titin functions as an entropic spring to produce elasticity within the muscle. Our lab has previously shown that the poly-E motif becomes more collapsed and flexible under acidic conditions. These studies were conducted in the absence of force, and we have now extended these studies using magnetic tweezers-based force-extension experiments at different pH values. An isolated region of one of the longest poly-E segments of PEVK was tested at pH 7.2 and pH 6.0. Force was applied between 15 pN to 55 pN and resulting extension was analyzed. Poly-E displayed more extension at pH 6.0 compared to pH 7.2. These results are consistent with our previous results and align with predictions from the worm-like chain (WLC) model which expects greater compliance at lower persistence length. We are currently testing constructs of the PPAK motif and combinations of poly-E and PPAK to further assess the pH dependence of the force. To investigate whether our single-molecule results may apply to titin’s PEVK when it is in its in-situ microenvironment, inside the sarcomere, we performed mechanical testing on isolated myofibrils. Myofibrils were immunolabeled at the N2A and distal PEVK (F146.9) regions permitting real-time tracking of titin’s PEVK length during stretch. Forces were measured using optical force nano-levers. Titin’s PEVK segment demonstrated a significantly decreased elastic modulus at physiological lengths at pH ≤ 6.5; at pH = 6.0 the elastic modulus of the PEVK segment was reduced by ∼58%. Thus, in isolated myofibrils, titin’s PEVK segment also shows increased compliance at low, yet physiological pH levels. These results support our model that the poly-E regions act as pH sensors to tune the stiffness of the muscle by modulating the compliance of the PEVK region.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wijayaweera et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: