Reviewer Spotlight: Fulin Ma

The quality of eNeuro depends on the effort that is generously contributed by our reviewers, who lend their expertise and time helping to ensure we publish great science. This Reviewer Recognition series introduces the research of selected reviewers, as well as their strategies for approaching peer review of a paper. Dr. Fulin Ma is currently a research assistant professor in the Department of Neurobiology at University of Pittsburgh. Ma’s research focuses on amyloid-beta (Aβ)–independent roles of the APP in Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis.

“I am a devoted supporter of Liverpool Football Club—watching the club’s matches, especially our Premier League title win last season, reminds me that hard work and perseverance always pay off, even when the path seems uncertain.”

Fulin Ma, PhD

Tell us about your work.  

My research focuses on Aβ-independent roles of the APP in Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis. While the field has traditionally centered on Aβ plaques as the primary driver of neurodegeneration, my work challenges this paradigm by investigating how the APP holoprotein itself—rather than its processed fragments—contributes to the disease. The overarching goal is to develop a more comprehensive mechanistic model of Alzheimer’s disease that explains why decades of amyloid-targeting therapies have not been successful clinically, and to identify novel therapeutic targets grounded in this revised understanding.

I approach this work from multiple angles, examining both cellular and molecular mechanisms. My research integrates postmortem human brain tissue analysis with experimental cellular models, allowing me to bridge findings from patient samples to controlled laboratory systems. This translational approach ensures that discoveries remain anchored in disease biology relevant to the human condition. Additionally, we have established novel technical capabilities in culturing dissociated embryonic mouse cortical neurons on high-density multielectrode arrays. This platform now enables us to systematically investigate how APP mutations alter network electrical activity—providing a quantitative, circuit-level readout of how genetic variants affect neuronal function.

What do you do when not in the lab?

I am a devoted supporter of Liverpool Football Club—watching the club’s matches, especially our Premier League title win last season, reminds me that hard work and perseverance always pay off, even when the path seems uncertain. It reinforces my belief that the challenges we face in understanding Alzheimer’s disease, like the setbacks Liverpool sometimes encounters on the pitch, are temporary obstacles on a longer journey toward meaningful success.

“Be constructive, not dismissive. I usually review the manuscript and frame the criticisms as opportunities for improvement rather than attacks.”

What advice would you share with new reviewers?

Start with the big picture. Before diving into technical details, you should read the entire manuscript to understand its central claim and contribution to the field. The foundational understanding will help you to evaluate the manuscript fairly.

I would also recommend starting the process early. Do not leave it until the last couple of days to finish the review. If you don’t think you have the time, let the editor know as soon as possible. As my mentor, Dr. Karl Herrup always told me: Try not to just tell the editors no. Sometimes, suggesting someone you know would be a good fit to the editor can also be very useful.

Be constructive, not dismissive. I usually review the manuscript and frame the criticisms as opportunities for improvement rather than attacks. I always keep in mind that we are here to help improve and make a better paper.

What is your experience as a reviewer with eNeuro's consultation review process?

I serve as a reviewer in a couple of neuroscience journals and as a guest editor for a special issue in Biomedicines. Most journals do not have a consultation process like eNeuro. I found the process quite important. It helps me to have a deeper understanding from the other reviewers’ perspectives by reading their comments. The interactions with the editors are also very valuable. These collaborations make the reviewing process into a genuine dialogue that produces more balanced, unbiased, and insightful feedback for authors.

Fulin Ma, PhD
Research Assistant Professor
Department of Neurobiology
University of Pittsburgh

Learn more:

eNeuro offers authors the choice to receive double-blind review.  Additionally, the Reviewing Editor and two reviewers will consult to reach a consensus on the decision and to draft a synthesis of the reviewers' comments explaining the decision. These review syntheses are published alongside each accepted paper.  Learn more about eNeuro's Review Process.