Key result
Anti-RLR antibody inhibited in vitro actin-myosin sliding without affecting muscle contraction, while anti-LD antibody reduced force development in muscle fibers without affecting in vitro sliding.
The study demonstrates definite differences in the effects of myosin head antibodies between in vitro actin-myosin sliding and muscle contraction, likely due to differences in myosin head orientation and arrangement.
Antibody effects differ by assay system; leaves open relevance to cardiac myosin regulation in vivo.
Muscle contraction results from attachment-detachment cycles between myosin heads extending from myosin filaments and actin filaments. It is generally believed that a myosin head first attaches to actin, undergoes conformational changes to produce force and motion in muscle, and then detaches from actin. Despite extensive studies, the molecular mechanism of myosin head conformational changes still remains to be a matter for debate and speculation. The myosin head consists of catalytic (CAD), converter (CVD) and lever arm (LD) domains. To give information about the role of these domains in the myosin head performance, we have examined the effect of three site-directed antibodies to the myosin head on in vitro ATP-dependent actin-myosin sliding and Ca2+-activated contraction of muscle fibers. Antibody 1, attaching to junctional peptide between 50K and 20K heavy chain segments in the CAD, exhibited appreciable effects neither on in vitro actin-myosin sliding nor muscle fiber contraction. Since antibody 1 covers actin-binding sites of the CAD, one interpretation of this result is that rigor actin-myosin linkage is absent or at most a transient intermediate in physiological actin-myosin cycling. Antibody 2, attaching to reactive lysine residue in the CVD, showed a marked inhibitory effect on in vitro actin-myosin sliding without changing actin-activated myosin head (S1) ATPase activity, while it showed no appreciable effect on muscle contraction. Antibody 3, attaching to two peptides of regulatory light chains in the LD, had no significant effect on in vitro actin-myosin sliding, while it reduced force development in muscle fibers without changing MgATPase activity. The above definite differences in the effect of antibodies 2 and 3 between in vitro actin-myosin sliding and muscle contraction can be explained by difference in experimental conditions; in the former, myosin heads are randomly oriented on a glass surface, while in the latter myosin heads are regularly arranged within filament-lattice structures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sugi et al. (2014) studied this question. Site-directed antibodies to the myosin head (anti-CAD, anti-RLR, anti-LD) vs. Absence of antibodies was evaluated on In vitro actin-myosin sliding velocity and Ca2+-activated isometric force development. Anti-RLR antibody inhibited in vitro actin-myosin sliding without affecting muscle contraction, while anti-LD antibody reduced force development in muscle fibers without affecting in vitro sliding.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: