Key result
Evaluation of mechanochemical models concludes that A.V. Hill's 1930s model, where mechanical potential is a function of force but not distance, best describes molecular motor mechanochemistry.
Why the study?
Defining the mechanical potential, Δµ ext, is fundamental to understanding how molecular motors work, yet its definition has remained disputed.
Theoretical evaluation concludes that A.V. Hill's mechanochemical model best describes the work performed by molecular motors.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No clinical practice change indicated; extends Hill's force-based model for molecular motor research.
Molecular motors are enzymes that perform work ( F · x ) when they move along a track a distance x against a constant force F . This work is performed through intermediate chemical steps in a motor’s ATPase reaction cycle, each step having a free energy change associated with it that is a sum of chemical, Δµ chem , and mechanical, Δµ ext , potentials. Defining Δµ ext is fundamental to our understanding of how molecular motors work, yet after decades of study the definition of Δµ ext remains disputed. Some postulate that Δµ ext is a function of both F and x , while others assume that Δµ ext is a function of neither F nor x , and still others argue that Δµ ext is a function of F but not x . Here we evaluate these models and conclude that only the latter – a mechanochemical model proposed by A.V. Hill in the 1930’s – describes molecular motor mechanochemistry.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Josh E. Baker (2019) reported a review. Evaluation of mechanochemical models concludes that A.V. Hill's 1930s model, where mechanical potential is a function of force but not distance, best describes molecular motor mechanochemistry.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: