First person – Raven Peterson

Raven Peterson

How would you explain the main findings of your paper in lay terms?

Our bodies maintain constant internal conditions despite changes in the external environment because, when cells adhere to each other to form tissues, they form a barrier that separates the inside from the outside. Our work demonstrates that certain proteins located on the top surface of a cell can act as a switch to regulate the barrier when stimulated in specific ways, such as with antibody-coated nanowires, and explores how this type of regulation occurs within a cell.

Were there any specific challenges associated with this project? If so, how did you overcome them?

For this project, we quickly figured out what we were going to do – conjugating anti-integrin antibodies to nanowires. The main challenge was putting the pieces together: identifying functional antibodies and learning to synthesize the nanowires on my own. This challenge, like many things, was overcome by digging into the literature and working closely with collaborators.

When doing the research, did you have a particular result or ‘eureka’ moment that has stuck with you?

It was early on in the project, when I first saw ruffled ZO-1 under the microscope followed by images of the ruffles overlaid with nanowires. I remember sitting back from the microscope, both in awe of the beauty of the image and with the realization that we had discovered a way to investigate the integrin-specific regulation of tight junctions.

Have you had any significant mentors who have helped you beyond supervision in the lab? How was their guidance special?

I've been privileged to have many mentors, but the two that come to mind as particularly critical to my journey are former Koval lab postdocs Prestina Smith-Davidson and Skye Comstra. They made the marathon of graduate school more manageable, inspired the way I teach and mentor others, and reinforced the importance of showing up as my authentic self in every situation.

What motivated you to pursue a career in science, and what have been the most interesting moments on the path that led you to where you are now?

When I was a teenager, I had a tumor removed, and pathology said it was pluripotent. The existence of a tumor that could generate any cell type captivated me and drove me to scientific research. I remained drawn to research as I learned that it is as much about conducting experiments as it is about learning to ask the right questions. The key moment that defined my research, and in fact this paper, came during a discussion about a possible rotation with my then-future PI, Mike Koval. He explained his lab's current hypothesis that apical integrins regulate tight junctions, but he noted that they lacked a clear way to demonstrate it. I think he said something along the lines of “what if for your rotation project, you just stuck antibodies on nanoparticles to see what happens?” I had so many ideas I wanted to explore and questions to ask, and at that moment, I knew I was hooked.

Who are your role models in science? Why?

My undergraduate mentors Emily Darrow and Carleen Sabusap. We learn about a lot of scientists in textbooks, but they were the first ones to demonstrate to me what being a scientist was in person. They made scientific excellence look easy, and their approach to thinking and bench work inspired my own.

What's next for you?

I left academia after graduating with my PhD because I wanted to marry my passions for science, communication and project management. Since then, I have joined a software company aimed at making scientific research more efficient. I love that it lets me stay close to science and support scientists from the other side of the bench.

Tell us something interesting about yourself that wouldn't be on your CV

I'm an artist; I do metal fabrication and sculpture.