Alternative N-terminal regions of Drosophila myosin heavy chain II regulate communication of the purine binding loop with the essential light chain

We investigated the biochemical and biophysical properties of one of the four alternative exon-encoded regions within the Drosophila myosin catalytic domain. This region is encoded by alternative exons 3a and 3b and includes part of the N-terminal β–barrel. Chimeric myosin constructs (IFI-3a and EMB-3b) were generated by exchanging the exon 3-encoded areas between native slow embryonic body wall (EMB) and fast indirect flight muscle myosin isoforms (IFI). We found that this exchange alters the kinetic properties of the myosin S1 head. The ADP release rate (k-D) in the absence of actin is completely reversed for each chimera compared to the native isoforms. Steady-state data also suggest a reciprocal shift, with basal and actin-activated ATPase activity of IFI-3a showing reduced values compared to wild-type IFI, whereas for EMB-3b these values are increased compared to wild-type EMB. In the presence of actin, ADP affinity (KAD) is unchanged for IFI-3a, compared to IFI, but ADP-affinity for EMB-3b is increased, compared to EMB, and shifted towards IFI values. ATP-induced dissociation of acto-S1 (K1k+2) is reduced for both exon 3 chimeras. Homology modeling, combined with a recently reported crystal structure for Drosophila EMB, indicate that the exon 3 encoded region in the myosin head is part of the communication pathway between the nucleotide binding pocket (purine-binding loop) and the essential light chain, emphasizing an important role for this variable N-terminal domain in regulating acto-myosin cross-bridge kinetics, in particular with respect to the force-sensing properties of myosin isoforms

Power and limitations of electrophoretic separations in proteomics strategies

Proteomics can be defined as the large-scale analysis of proteins. Due to the complexity of biological systems, it is required to concatenate various separation techniques prior to mass spectrometry. These techniques, dealing with proteins or peptides, can rely on chromatography or electrophoresis. In this review, the electrophoretic techniques are under scrutiny. Their principles are recalled, and their applications for peptide and protein separations are presented and critically discussed. In addition, the features that are specific to gel electrophoresis and that interplay with mass spectrometry (i.e., protein detection after electrophoresis, and the process leading from a gel piece to a solution of peptides) are also discussed

Substrate and Product Dependence of Force and Shortening in Fast and Slow Smooth Muscle

To explore the molecular mechanisms responsible for the variation in smooth muscle contractile kinetics, the influence of MgATP, MgADP, and inorganic phosphate (Pi) on force and shortening velocity in thiophosphorylated “fast” (taenia coli: maximal shortening velocity Vmax = 0.11 ML/s) and “slow” (aorta: Vmax = 0.015 ML/s) smooth muscle from the guinea pig were compared. Pi inhibited active force with minor effects on the Vmax. In the taenia coli, 20 mM Pi inhibited force by 25%. In the aorta, the effect was markedly less (<10%), suggesting differences between fast and slow smooth muscles in the binding of Pi or in the relative population of Pi binding states during cycling. Lowering of MgATP reduced force and Vmax. The aorta was less sensitive to reduction in MgATP (Km for Vmax: 80 μM) than the taenia coli (Km for Vmax: 350 μM). Thus, velocity is controlled by steps preceding the ATP binding and cross-bridge dissociation, and a weaker binding of ATP is not responsible for the lower Vmax in the slow muscle. MgADP inhibited force and Vmax. Saturating concentrations of ADP did not completely inhibit maximal shortening velocity. The effect of ADP on Vmax was observed at lower concentrations in the aorta compared with the taenia coli, suggesting that the ADP binding to phosphorylated and cycling cross-bridges is stronger in slow compared with fast smooth muscle

Identification of functional differences between recombinant human α and β cardiac myosin motors

The myosin isoform composition of the heart is dynamic in health and disease and has been shown to affect contractile velocity and force generation. While different mammalian species express different proportions of α and β myosin heavy chain, healthy human heart ventricles express these isoforms in a ratio of about 1:9 (α:β) while failing human ventricles express no detectable α-myosin. We report here fast-kinetic analysis of recombinant human α and β myosin heavy chain motor domains. This represents the first such analysis of any human muscle myosin motor and the first of α-myosin from any species. Our findings reveal substantial isoform differences in individual kinetic parameters, overall contractile character, and predicted cycle times. For these parameters, α-subfragment 1 (S1) is far more similar to adult fast skeletal muscle myosin isoforms than to the slow β isoform despite 91% sequence identity between the motor domains of α- and β-myosin. Among the features that differentiate α- from β-S1: the ATP hydrolysis step of α-S1 is ~ten-fold faster than β-S1, α-S1 exhibits ~five-fold weaker actin affinity than β-S1, and actin·α-S1 exhibits rapid ADP release, which is >ten-fold faster than ADP release for β-S1. Overall, the cycle times are ten-fold faster for α-S1 but the portion of time each myosin spends tightly bound to actin (the duty ratio) is similar. Sequence analysis points to regions that might underlie the basis for this finding

Modeling the Actin.myosin ATPase cross-bridge cycle for skeletal and cardiac muscle myosin isoforms

Modeling the complete actin.myosin ATPase cycle has always been limited by the lack of experimental data concerning key steps of the cycle, because these steps can only be defined at very low ionic strength. Here, using human ?-cardiac myosin-S1, we combine published data from transient and steady-state kinetics to model a minimal eight-state ATPase cycle. The model illustrates the occupancy of each intermediate around the cycle and how the occupancy is altered by changes in actin concentration for [actin] = 1–20Km. The cycle can be used to predict the maximal velocity of contraction (by motility assay or sarcomeric shortening) at different actin concentrations (which is consistent with experimental velocity data) and predict the effect of a 5 pN load on a single motor. The same exercise was repeated for human ?-cardiac myosin S1 and rabbit fast skeletal muscle S1. The data illustrates how the motor domain properties can alter the ATPase cycle and hence the occupancy of the key states in the cycle. These in turn alter the predicted mechanical response of the myosin independent of other factors present in a sarcomere, such as filament stiffness and regulatory proteins. We also explore the potential of this modeling approach for the study of mutations in human ?-cardiac myosin using the hypertrophic myopathy mutation R453C. Our modeling, using the transient kinetic data, predicts mechanical properties of the motor that are compatible with the single-molecule study. The modeling approach may therefore be of wide use for predicting the properties of myosin mutations