It is not known which kinetic step in the acto-myosin ATPase cycle limits contraction speed in unloaded muscles (V0). Huxley’s 1957 model [Huxley AF (1957) Prog Biophys Biophys Chem 7:255–318] predicts that V0 is limited by the rate that myosin detaches from actin. However, this does not explain why, as observed by Bárány [Bárány M (1967) J Gen Physiol 50(6, Suppl):197–218], V0 is linearly correlated with the maximal actin-activated ATPase rate (vmax), which is limited by the rate that myosin attaches strongly to actin. We have observed smooth muscle myosin filaments of different length and head number (N) moving over surface-attached F-actin in vitro. Fitting filament velocities (V) vs. N to a detachment-limited model using the myosin step size d = 8 nm gave an ADP release rate 8.5-fold faster and ton (myosin’s attached time) and r (duty ratio) ∼10-fold lower than previously reported. In contrast, these data were accurately fit to an attachment-limited model, V = N·v·d, over the range of N found in all muscle types. At nonphysiologically high N, V = L/ton rather than d/ton, where L is related to the length of myosin’s subfragment 2. The attachment-limited model also fit well to the [ATP] dependence of V for myosin-rod cofilaments at three fixed N. Previously published V0 vs. vmax values for 24 different muscles were accurately fit to the attachment-limited model using widely accepted values for r and N, giving d = 11.1 nm. Therefore, in contrast with Huxley’s model, we conclude that V0 is limited by the actin–myosin attachment rate.

Enzymatic deconstruction of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) is under intense investigation, given the ability of hydrolase enzymes to depolymerize PET to its constituent monomers near the polymer glass transition temperature. To date, reported PET hydrolases have been sourced from a relatively narrow sequence space. Here, we identify additional PET-active biocatalysts from natural diversity by using bioinformatics and machine learning to mine 74 putative thermotolerant PET hydrolases. We successfully express, purify, and assay 51 enzymes from seven distinct phylogenetic groups; observing PET hydrolysis activity on amorphous PET film from 37 enzymes in reactions spanning pH from 4.5–9.0 and temperatures from 30–70 °C. We conduct PET hydrolysis time-course reactions with the best-performing enzymes, where we observe differences in substrate selectivity as function of PET morphology. We employed X-ray crystallography and AlphaFold to examine the enzyme architectures of all 74 candidates, revealing protein folds and accessory domains not previously associated with PET deconstruction. Overall, this study expands the number and diversity of thermotolerant scaffolds for enzymatic PET deconstruction.

Enzymatic depolymerization of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) has emerged as a potential method for PET recycling, but extensive thermomechanical preprocessing to reduce both the crystallinity and particle size of PET is often conducted, which is costly and energy-intensive. In the current work, we use highcrystallinity PET (HC-PET) and low-crystallinity cryomilled PET (CM-PET) with three distinct particle size distributions to investigate the effect of PET particle size and crystallinity on the performance of a variant of the leaf compost-cutinase enzyme (LCC-ICCG). We show that LCC-ICCG hydrolyzes PET, resulting in the accumulation of terephthalic acid and, interestingly, also releases significant amount of mono(2hydroxyethyl)terephthalate. Particle size reduction of PET increased the maximum rate of reaction for HC-PET, while the maximum hydrolysis rate for CM-PET was not significantly different across particle sizes. For both substrates, however, we show that particle size reduction has little effect on the overall conversion extent. Specifically, the CM-PET film was converted to 99 ± 0.2% mass loss within 48 h, while the HC-PET powder reached only 23.5 ± 0.0% conversion in 144 h. Overall, these results suggest that amorphization of PET is a necessary pretreatment step for enzymatic PET recycling using the LCC-ICCG enzyme but that particle size reduction may not be required.

Background: Myosin polymerizes into filaments that move on actin. Results: ATPase and moving velocities of filaments may be limited by the weak to strong transition. Conclusion: Filaments moving on top of actin may have fewer drag heads than actin filaments moving on myosin monomers. Significance: Understanding kinetics of intact myosin filaments with actin is important to understand muscle mechanics.

Reconstituted muscle-like assays reveal novel mechanisms that control the speed of muscle contraction.