We do not share Professor Lombardi’s confidence that the crossbridge stiffness and the fraction of myosin heads (crossbridges) attached in an isometric contraction are experimentally well established for muscles in these two frog species (Lombardi 2011). In particular we are not persuaded that the crossbridge stiffness is high (*3 pN/ nm) and the fraction of attached heads is low (20% in Rana esculenta and 30% in Rana temporaria). Determination of the crossbridge stiffness in muscle requires knowledge of the fraction of heads attached in an isometric contraction, since it is the product of the crossbridge stiffness and this fraction that is usually determined by subtracting the filament compliance from the half-sarcomere compliance. This inter-relation would cause an overestimate of the crossbridge stiffness to lead to the fraction of crossbridges attached being underestimated. An alternative approach which avoids knowing the fraction of heads attached in an isometric contraction is to determine the crossbridge stiffness in the rigor state. Unfortunately this is subject to large errors because the half-sarcomere compliance in the rigor state is not much larger than the contribution of filament compliance. The thermodynamic approach used for Rana esculenta (Decostre et al. 2005), which appeared at first to offer the hope of determining the crossbridge stiffness directly, is regrettably without foundation as we showed in Appendix 2 of our review (Offer and Ranatunga 2010). The fraction of myosin heads attached in an isometric contraction can be obtained from the ratio of the contribution of crossbridges to the half-sarcomere compliance in rigor to that in the active state. But as the rigor crossbridge compliance contribution can be determined only with a large error, the fraction of heads attached in an isometric contraction also carries a large error. In an earlier study (Linari et al. 1998) thick filament compliance in Rana esculenta was estimated from changes in the spacing of the M3 myosin meridional X-ray reflection. From the ratio of crossbridge compliance contributions in active and rigor muscle, the fraction of heads in isometric contraction may be calculated as 0.43 ± 0.087. But deciding that the M6 reflection should give a more reliable indication of the thick filament compliance, required their estimate of the fraction of heads attached in an isometric contraction to fall to 0.20 ± 0.12 (Linari et al. 2007). Even these large standard errors do not include the errors in determining the thick filament compliance. Moreover, there may be a systematic error in this quantity since it is by no means clear that the M6 reflection is exclusively contributed by detached heads. In our review we discussed the wide range of values that have been reported for the fraction of myosin heads attached (Offer and Ranatunga 2010). In particular, Bershitsky et al. (1997) gauged the number of heads attached in a stereospecific manner in isometrically contracting semitendinosus fibres of Rana temporaria from the intensity of the first actin layer line. At 5–6 C 27% were stereospecifically attached, but after rapidly raising the temperature to 16–19 C by a T-jump, this rose to 46%. This implied that the total fraction of heads attached was more than 46%. Because of this uncertainty, in the main body of the review we were careful to express crossbridge G. Offer K. W. Ranatunga (&) School of Physiology & Pharmacology, The Medical Sciences Building, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK e-mail: k.w.ranatunga@bristol.ac.uk
Read full abstract