Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30872560›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of general physiology2019

Comparing models with one versus multiple myosin-binding sites per actin target zone: The power of simplicity.

Alf Månsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of general physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Force Measurements From Myofibril to Filament.Frontiers in physiology · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Alf MånssonDepartment of Chemistry and Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden alf.mansson@lnu.se.ORCID 0000-0002-5889-7792

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mechanokinetic statistical models describe the mechanisms of muscle contraction on the basis of the average behavior of a large ensemble of actin-myosin motors. Such models often assume that myosin II motor domains bind to regularly spaced, discrete target zones along the actin-based thin filaments and develop force in a series of strain-dependent transitions under the turnover of ATP. The simplest models assume that there is just one myosin-binding site per target zone and a uniform spatial distribution of the myosin motor domains in relation to each site. However, most of the recently developed models assume three myosin-binding sites per target zone, and some models include a spatially explicit 3-D treatment of the myofilament lattice and thereby of the geometry of the actin-myosin contact points. Here, I show that the predictions for steady-state contractile behavior of muscle are very similar whether one or three myosin-binding sites per target zone is assumed, provided that the model responses are appropriately scaled to the number of sites. Comparison of the model predictions for isometrically contracting mammalian muscle cells suggests that each target zone contains three or more myosin-binding sites. Finally, I discuss the strengths and weaknesses of one-site spatially inexplicit models in relation to three-site models, including those that take into account the detailed 3-D geometry of the myofilament lattice. The results of this study suggest that single-site models, with reduced computational cost compared with multisite models, are useful for several purposes, e.g., facilitated molecular mechanistic insights.

Indexed as

Models, ChemicalActinsBinding SitesMuscle ContractionMuscle Fibers, SkeletalMyosinsProtein ConformationActinsMyosins

Identifiers

PMID30872560
PMCPMC6445577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.