“…The first hypothesis (Vibert andCraig, 1982, 1985;Vibert et al, 1986) is supported by data and modeling showing that 1) the head-rod junction (the neck) of the myosin molecule is flexible (Málnási-Csizmadia et al, 1998;Li et al, 2003), 2) Ca ++ binding likely changes neck flexibility (Houdusse and Cohen, 1996;Málnási-Csizmadia et al, 1999) (although see Wells and Bagshaw, 1984b), 3) the two myosin heads can lie alongside one another (Offer and Knight, 1996), 4) the ATP and Ca ++ binding sites of the two heads communicate in the 'off' state (Kalabokis and Szent-Györgyi, 1997;Azzu et al, 2006), EDTA increases the extent to which the two heads show correlated movement (Wells and Bagshaw, 1983), and 6) in the absence of Ca ++ the heads are highly ordered and primarily extend towards the tail (Vibert and Craig, 1985;Craig, 1989, 1992;Stafford III et al, 2001;Zhao and Craig, 2003a). The idea is that in the absence of Ca ++ the heads interact with one another and are thus prevented from interacting with the thin filament, and Ca ++ -induced changes in the flexibility of the myosin neck (where the regulatory complex is located) frees the heads to act independently.…”