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

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.