Spotlight on Peroxisomes: A Sole-Author Review
Publishing your first sole-author review is a big milestone for any scientist. For neuroscientist Ruth Carmichael of the University of Exeter, UK, it was not only a personal achievement but also a chance to shine a spotlight on one of the cell’s most underappreciated organelles: the peroxisome.
Her review “Peroxisome dynamics and inter-organelle interactions in neuronal health and disease” was recently published in Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, and we asked Ruth to share a little about her experience writing it, the science behind it, and her reflections on the process as a whole.
Writing my first sole-author review
The opportunity to write my first sole-author review came about thanks to the brilliant ‘PeroxiPower’ mailing list which connects peroxisome researchers around the world. Through their updates I was alerted to an opportunity to submit articles for a special issue in Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience which would focus on peroxisomes in nervous tissue. I had been considering writing a sole-author review since starting my Fellowship in 2024 because I saw it as a way to begin building an independent profile in the field. This seemed like the perfect opportunity and it gave me the push I needed to start writing.
To establish my independent research, I decided to start by focusing on how and why peroxisomes and mitochondria interact with each other in neurons, which combined my PhD experience in molecular neuroscience with my post-doc experience in organelle biology. I chose this direction because I personally find it fascinating, but also because I realised there were lots of knowledge gaps in this important topic, and therefore lots of discoveries to be made.
When writing my grant, I had to spend a lot of time searching through the literature to identify what was and wasn’t known about peroxisome dynamics and interactions in neurons, so I appreciated the need for a review article summarising and drawing attention to this part of the field.
The unique challenges of writing solo
I’ve written a number of reviews with co-authors during my career, so I thought I knew what to expect – but this was a very different experience! It was significantly more time-consuming, as I wasn’t able to share the workload with others (making all the figures myself was particularly challenging), but ultimately it was more satisfying as I could really shape the review to be what I wanted it to be. I was worried about keeping a clear narrative and not missing anything important, but luckily I had great mentors and collaborators who were happy to bounce ideas around and give their advice and opinions on drafts I’d written. So it wasn’t a completely solo effort (shout-outs to Michael Schrader, Markus Islinger and Kevin Wilkinson)!
Deciding on the scope of the review at the start was a big challenge – making it broad enough to be of general interest but not too broad as to lose focus. Also, without regular rounds of feedback from others during the writing process, it was hard not to get tunnel vision – I had to step away for a few days then reread what I had written to check I was on track and pitching it at the right level.
I also found time management a challenge and had to be very self-disciplined without internal deadlines and reminders from co-authors. It was the first time I had responded to peer-reviewer comments on my own as well, which, although very positive, meant a few long days revising the manuscript for a tight turn-around.
Why are peroxisomes so important?
Peroxisomes are small but mighty membrane-bound organelles, found in almost all eukaryotic cells, which play essential roles in lipid and redox homeostasis. Their jobs include breaking down potentially toxic very long-chain fatty acids, synthesising lipids including DHA (crucial for brain function) and plasmalogens (an essential component of myelin sheath lipids), and protecting the cell from reactive oxygen species. These functions are particularly important in neurons, which rely on a tightly-regulated membrane lipid composition (e.g. for action potential firing and synapse formation/function) and, being post-mitotic, need particular protection from oxidative stress. Notably, disorders affecting peroxisome biogenesis or metabolism almost always have neurological symptoms, highlighting just how important these organelles are in maintaining healthy brain function.
Peroxisomes and mitochondria have a really close relationship in terms of both what they do and how they are formed – they even share a number of key proteins. However, when researchers study these proteins, they often only look at their effects on mitochondria, presumably because they are more widely studied and there are better established ways to look at their function (e.g. read-outs like ATP production). However, we know from the devastating symptoms of peroxisomal disorders that peroxisomes are incredibly important for brain health, so I think their contribution shouldn’t be overlooked. Also, I might be biased, but I find the wide range of functions that peroxisomes perform in lipid and redox homeostasis particularly fascinating, and given they are so relevant to neurons I would encourage more neuronal cell biologists to pay them attention!
Most of what’s been written so far about peroxisomes in neurons has focussed on their metabolic functions, so I really wanted to highlight how important other aspects of peroxisome biology are in neurons. In particular, peroxisomes are highly dynamic organelles that respond rapidly to changes in their environment. Patients with mutations in proteins controlling peroxisome dynamics have neurological symptoms, despite healthy peroxisomal metabolism, which emphasises how important this adaptability is for brain health. There’s also growing evidence that this dynamic behaviour might be compromised in a number of neurodegenerative disorders, so targeting these pathways could be a possible therapeutic strategy for the future.
Interesting interactions
A very hot topic in cell biology at the moment is the cooperation between different organelles within a cell via physical points of contact. Mitochondria-endoplasmic reticulum interactions are the best studied in the brain – these regulate neuronal function and are altered in a range of neurodegenerative diseases – but whether peroxisome-organelle interactions are also key in maintaining healthy neuronal function is an exciting area for future research.
Since publishing the review, I have co-authored a paper in Science with colleagues at The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, showing that physical contact between peroxisomes and mitochondria helps protect mitochondria from oxidative stress (DOI: 10.1126/science.adn2804) – how this contributes to neuronal health and disease is my next big question to answer!
What I’ve learned as a sole-author
Writing this review was a valuable experience, and on a personal level, it was so satisfying to see a piece of work that I had put a lot of effort into, on a topic I’m very passionate about, in print – I’m very proud of it!
Professionally, I think it’s been an important milestone in terms of demonstrating my transition to independence and helping me gain some recognition in this research area. I hope it brings some more attention to this fascinating topic (maybe along with some new collaborators for the future!).
I’m also really glad I wrote the review towards the start of my Fellowship, as it made me take a deep-dive into the literature which gave me lots of ideas for future research directions as well as the best approaches to take. It definitely helped me get a better awareness and understanding of the field I was going into. From the writing side, it helped me learn how to create a compelling narrative and gave me practice in explaining tricky concepts in a clear, accurate but concise way. Hopefully this first experience of managing the submission, revision and ultimate publication of a paper in a journal will also be valuable for any corresponding-author manuscripts I submit in the future (fingers crossed…).
My final words for future reviewers
To early-career researchers looking for similar review opportunities, I would say it’s a significant commitment, so discuss the pros and cons for you personally with someone you trust before going ahead. If you haven’t written a review as a co-author before, I would suggest starting with that, as otherwise it will be a steep learning curve.
My main bit of advice, if you decide to embark on a sole-author review, is to get input from mentors/supervisors/colleagues at the start when figuring out what you want to write about – personally, I found brainstorming with others really helpful, even if I didn’t end up taking all the ideas forward. Then also get people who are familiar with the field to give you (honest!) feedback before you submit, this certainly helped to improve my review significantly. Finally, set yourself strict deadlines well ahead of time to keep yourself on track.
About the author
Ruth Carmichael is a molecular cell biologist who was recently awarded a 3-year BBSRC Discovery Fellowship to establish her own independent research into organelle communication in neuronal cells at the University of Exeter. She completed an MSci degree in Biochemistry at the University of Cambridge, before carrying out a four-year BBSRC-funded PhD in the lab of Professor Jeremy Henley at the University of Bristol, studying molecular neuroscience. She then completed two short postdoc positions at the University of the West of England and University of Bristol, before joining the University of Exeter in 2018 as a postdoc in the lab of Professor Michael Schrader, looking at organelle dynamics and interactions, with a particular focus on peroxisomes.
Connect with Ruth:
-
LinkedIn: Ruth Carmichael
-
X (Twitter): Ruth Carmichael
-
Schrader Lab: https://schraderlab.weebly.com/
More advice on writing & reviewing from Hello Bio
If you’d like to read more about the science writing and the reviewing experience, direct from scientists themselves, take a look at these other great resources on the Hello Bio blog:
Join 1000s of Scientists
Be the first to hear about new product launches, free trials, special offers, and technical tips — straight to your inbox.
Subscribe to the NewsletterHigh Quality – Low Prices
By manufacturing in-house and keeping things simple, we offer savings of up to 50% compared to traditional suppliers — without compromising on quality.
