Remodelling of skeletal muscle myosin metabolic states in hibernating mammals

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:
The evolution of non-shivering thermogenesis is of fundamental importance to understand. Here, in small mammals, the contractile apparatus of the muscle is shown to increase energy expenditure upon a drop in ambient temperature. Additionally, in the state of torpor, small hibernators did not show an increase in energy expenditure under the same challenge.

Strengths:
The authors have conducted a very well-planned study that has sampled the muscles of large and small hibernators from two continents. Multiple approaches were then used to identify the state of the contractile apparatus, and its energy expenditure under torpor or otherwise.

Weaknesses:
There was only one site of biopsy from the animals used (leg). It would be interesting to know if non-shivering thermogenesis is something that is regionally different in the animal, given the core body and distal limbs have different temperatures.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:
The authors utilized (permeabilized) fibers from muscle samples obtained from brown and black bears, squirrels, and Garden dormice, to provide interesting and valuable data regarding changes in myosin conformational states and energetics during hibernation and different types of activity in summer and winter. Assuming that myosin structure is similar between species then its role as a regulator of metabolism would be similar and not different, yet the data reveal some interesting and perplexing differences between the selected hibernating species.

Strengths:
The experiments on the permeabilized fibers are complementary, sophisticated, and well-performed, providing new information regarding the characteristics of skeletal muscle fibers between selected hibernating mammalian species under different conditions (summer, interarousal, and winter).

The studies involve complementary assessments of muscle fiber biochemistry, sarcomeric structure using X-ray diffraction, and proteomic analyses of posttranslational modifications.

Weaknesses:
It would be helpful to put these findings on permeabilized fibers into context with the other anatomical/metabolic differences between the species to determine the relative contribution of myosin energetics (with these other contributors) to overall metabolism in these different species, including factors such as fat volume/distribution.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary and strengths:
The manuscript, "Remodelling of skeletal muscle myosin metabolic states in hibernating mammals", by Lewis et al, investigates whether myosin ATP activity may differ between states of hibernation and activity in both large and small mammals. The study interrogates (primarily) permeabilized muscle strips or myofibrils using several state-of-the-art assays, including the mant-ATP assay to investigate ATP utilization of myosin, X-ray diffraction of muscles, proteomics studies, metabolic tests, and computational simulations. The overall data suggests that ATP utilization of myosin during hibernation is different than in active conditions.

A clear strength of this study is the use of multiple animals that utilize two different states of hibernation or torpor. Two large animal hibernators (Eurasian Brown Bear, American Black Bear) represent large animal hibernators that typically undergo prolonged hibernation. Two small animal hibernators (Garden Dormouse, 13 Lined Ground Squirrel) undergo torpor with more substantial reductions in heart rate and body temperature, but whose torpor bouts are interrupted by short arousals that bring the animals back to near-summer-like metabolic conditions.

Especially interesting, the investigators analyze the impact that body temperature may have on myosin ATP utilization by performing assays at two different temperatures (8 and 20 degrees C, in 13 Lined Ground Squirrels).

The multiple assays utilized provide a more comprehensive set of methods with which to test their hypothesis that muscle myosins change their metabolic efficiency during hibernation.

Suggestions and potential weaknesses:
While the samples and assays provide a robust and comprehensive coverage of metabolic needs and testing, the data is less categorical. Some of these may be dependent on sample size or statistical analysis while others may be dependent on interpretation.

(1) Statistical Analysis
(1.a) The results of this study often cannot be assessed properly due to a lack of clarity in the statistical tests.
For example, the results related to the large animal hibernators (Figure 1) do not describe the statistical test (in the text of the results, methods, or figure legends). (Similarly for figure 6 and Supplemental Figure 1). Further, it is not clear whether or when the analysis was performed with paired samples. As the methods described, it appears that the Eurasian Brown Bear data should be paired per animal.

(1.b) The statistical methods state that non-parametric testing was utilized "where data was unevenly distributed". Please clarify when this was used.

(1.c) While there are two different myosin isoforms, the isoform may be considered a factor. It is unclear why a one-way ANOVA is generally used for most of the mant-ATP chase data.

(1.d) While the technical replicates on studies such as the mant-ATP chase assay are well done, the total biological replicates are small. A consideration of the sample power should be included.

(1.e) An analysis of the biological vs statistical significance should be considered, especially for the mant-ATP chase data from the American Black Bear, where there appear to be shifts between the summer and winter data.

(2) Consistency of DRX/SRX data.
(2.a) The investigators performed both mant-ATP chase and x-ray diffraction studies to investigate whether myosin heads are in an "on" or "off" state. The results of these two studies do not appear to be fully consistent with each other, which should not be a surprise. The recent work of Mohran et al (PMID 38103642) suggests that the mant-ATP-predicted SRX:DRX proportions are inconsistent with the position of the myosin heads. The discussion appears to lack a detailed assessment of this prior work and lack a substantive assessment contrasting the differing results of the two assays in the current study. i.e. why the current study's mant-ATP chase and x-ray diffraction results differ.

(2.b) The discussion of the current study's x-ray diffraction data relating to the I_1,1/I_1,0 ratio and how substantially different this is to the M6 results merits discussion. i.e. how can myosin both be more primed to contract during IBA versus torpor (according to intensity ratio), but also have less mass near the thick filament (M6).

(3) Possible interactions with Heat Shock Proteins
Heat Shock Proteins (HSPs), such as HSP70, have been shown to be differential during torpor vs active states. A brief search of HSP and myosin reveals HPSs related to thick filament assembly and Heat Shock Cognate 70 interacting with myosin binding protein C. Especially given the author's discussion of protein stability and the potential interaction with myosin binding protein C and the SRX state, the limitation of not assessing HSPs should be discussed. (While HSP's relation to thick filament assembly might conceivably modify the interpretation of the M3 x-ray diffraction results, this reviewer acknowledges that possibility as a leap.)

Despite the above substantial concerns/weaknesses, this reviewer believes that this manuscript represents a valuable data set.

Other comments related to interpretation:
(4) The authors briefly mention the study by Toepher et al [Ref 25] and that it utilizes cardiac muscles. There would benefit from increased discussion regarding the possible differences in energetics between cardiac and skeletal muscle in these states.

(5) The author's analysis of temperature is somewhat limited.
(5.a) First, the authors use 20 degrees C (room temperature), not 37 degrees C, a more physiologic body temperature for large mammals. While it is true that limbs are likely at a lower temperature, 20 degrees C seems substantially outside of a normal range. Thus, temperature differences may have been minimized by the author's protocol.

(5.b) Second, the authors discuss the possibility of myosin contributing to non-shivering thermogenesis. The magnitude of this impact should be discussed. The suggestion of myosin ATP utilization also implies that there is some basal muscle tone (contraction), as the myosin ATPase utilizes ATP to release from actin, before binding and hydrolyzing again. Evidence of this tone should be discussed.